2011.05.17 Jury Selection DAY EIGHT (Morning Edition)
- Thread starter beach
- Start date
- Status
TiaM
Calm and Watchful Now
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,746
- Reaction score
- 0
IMO, now that cooler heads have prevailed, HHJP knows LDB is correct, however I don't think he CAN change his mind. It will set a bad precedent for you-know-who to try to get all his denials reheard. And then whine on appeal if they are not.
Stella5
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 2,104
- Reaction score
- -19
Come on JP... do the right thing! This woman needs to be struck... doesn't matter if she's purple, she cannot be on this jury with her inability to judge other people no matter what. Praying to the juror gods that he listens carefully to this argument!
Intermezzo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2008
- Messages
- 10,623
- Reaction score
- 1,679
IMO From this jurors own admission about religious beliefs and not judging people this juror is not qualified to sit on any jury.
As I see it ...the DT and JBP are FORCING this woman to sit in judgment...yet they have IMO dismissed other pot. jurors for less.
:twocents:
Chiquita71
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 3,835
- Reaction score
- 2
LDB: that she is saying the reasons were the jurors inability to sit in judgment of others.
HHJP: you said something different. was there any concern about a juror to hang a jury.
LDB: that could be implied but the argument is the same.
HHJP: there are other folks who's first given answers who had answers where there was confusion about something and they gave an answer, like the last gent who works for raymond james, so to speak...but go on.
LDB: if this juror didn't come back on the inquiries and say, yes I could follow the courts instruction then we will have a cause challenge...I don't believe that she was confused was the only question was do you have a hardship? in her mind the hardship wasn't family or financial it was religious. at that point she was not being given questions about law...she was quite clear...there were efforts to rehabilitate we feel there was insufficent equivication...and strike juror number...
one more thing. the case law requires certain things from the defense...they must recognize they are a minority...stipulating race neutral reasons...third step the defense must establish pretext...there was no argument on behalf of the defendent...the record does support.
JB: I object proceedurely. I want transcripts to...
HHJP: you said something different. was there any concern about a juror to hang a jury.
LDB: that could be implied but the argument is the same.
HHJP: there are other folks who's first given answers who had answers where there was confusion about something and they gave an answer, like the last gent who works for raymond james, so to speak...but go on.
LDB: if this juror didn't come back on the inquiries and say, yes I could follow the courts instruction then we will have a cause challenge...I don't believe that she was confused was the only question was do you have a hardship? in her mind the hardship wasn't family or financial it was religious. at that point she was not being given questions about law...she was quite clear...there were efforts to rehabilitate we feel there was insufficent equivication...and strike juror number...
one more thing. the case law requires certain things from the defense...they must recognize they are a minority...stipulating race neutral reasons...third step the defense must establish pretext...there was no argument on behalf of the defendent...the record does support.
JB: I object proceedurely. I want transcripts to...
TiaM
Calm and Watchful Now
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,746
- Reaction score
- 0
I agree. I don't thing the SA thought in a million years the judge would deny their challenge. Because they WERE right in wanting her gone.
ETA: Oh boy, here comes DT with stall, stall, stall.....grrr
ETAA: Baez' new word this week: "Equivocation" brought to you by the letter E....grrrrr
EclecticArtist
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Messages
- 215
- Reaction score
- 0
I am so frustrated this morming, not being able to hear SA & DT, I can hardly swallow!!!
I agree. The judge backed himself into a corner on this one, and now JB is calling him out on it. If he is going to hear SA's objection, then he has to let JB do his thing.
nomoresorrow
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2008
- Messages
- 3,576
- Reaction score
- 264
Is it just me or does anyone else think having a child sitting in that courtroom is inappropriate?
kinsey milhoune
New Member
Oh man, JB is playing games already!
Wise Old Owl
Retired WS Staff & Founding member of AFKBPOFPOPL
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2008
- Messages
- 13,866
- Reaction score
- 2,316
Now JB wants transcripts of other jurors since LDB got one
JB wants: 1129, 1011, 3119, 3397
So he can aruge too.
But wasn't 1129 stricken this morning?
JB wants: 1129, 1011, 3119, 3397
So he can aruge too.
But wasn't 1129 stricken this morning?
cluciano63
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 41,198
- Reaction score
- 27,312
Now defense wants transcripts on jurors, since state got them...
angelmom
The love stays...forever in our hearts
JB is threatening to strike a bunch more if SA pursues this.
I hope HHJBP calls his bluff. This was the only juror who they tried to strike and were denied. JB could have used a peremptory on all those.
I hope HHJBP calls his bluff. This was the only juror who they tried to strike and were denied. JB could have used a peremptory on all those.
Amity
Attention Span of a Gnat
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,169
- Reaction score
- 2
With the exception of a commercial thrown in a couple times an hour (takes the place of time-outs....no having to keep an eye on the live feed and click to continue watching), this has been the best for viewing/hearing, at least for me.
http://www.wftv.com/caseytriallive1/index.html
http://www.wftv.com/caseytriallive1/index.html
- Status